Petike the Taffer on 7/1/2009 at 11:42
Quote Posted by all
Of course, I am aware there is no explicit mention of this in the games. But doesn't the title of Baron presuppose a higher ruling order?
I'm not sure, but the apparent consensus on TTLG is, that the City is an independent city-state, with the Baron as it's head. As for the vagueness of the Baron's title :
Even today, (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_monarchies) small monarchies survive in several parts of Europe, often being former parts of bigger empires. Most of these therefore still carry titles traditionally ranked lower than "kingdom" (lat.
regis). The same goes for their rulers. Most of these states are recognised as either "principalities" or "duchies" in the English naming system : the Principality of Monaco, Principality of Lichtenstein, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, etc. Heck, even Andorra declares itself a principality, if only by tradition - since it never had any nobility and is technically a republic (with slight monarchic elements). So, the Baron of the City in Garrett's world could be a title with a similarly complicated history behind it. The City might have been a part of a once greater empire, that lost it's fortune and political power ages ago, and became balkanised into many smaller nations, some more succesful than the others.
Also, considering Thief is set in a fantasy analogue of real world history, the terms used for the ranks of nobility could probably differ from the standards set in the real European Middle Ages. Thus, the "barons" from the Thiefverse could possibly be on the same level of power and stature as "kings".
Herr_Garrett on 7/1/2009 at 15:41
Quote Posted by all
But doesn't the title of Baron presuppose a higher ruling order?
Not at all. The Baron is a very high rank in itself, only outranked by (in order), Earl, Duke, Prince (where the distinction between Duke and Prince exists), King, Emperor.
The Baron originally held lands in exchange for its defence - so barons usually got the more outlaying areas, that is, the marks. Now, the City is not a mark, to be sure - but titles can be created at will and in compliance, e.g. 'Lord Protector' 'Archduke' 'Supreme Emperor' or 'Supreme Ruler'. These are fancy names, but do not have meaningful title
per se. So, how about the idea that a long, long time ago the City Council created this title for the man who was in charge of the City's defence? They might have got the idea from elsewhere, certainly - for all we know, there might be empires outside of the City.
Synonyms for 'baron' (in its original meaning) are '(vis)count' '(vi)comte' or, for my sake, 'gróf' :cheeky:
Of course, later the count-baron-comte etc. distinction arose, but that was just the doing of unimaginative kings, who wanted to create new offices for their cronies, but weren't bright enough to think up a few new words. A sad lesson for all rulers out there ...:p
Solabusca on 8/1/2009 at 01:26
Quote Posted by Herr_Garrett
Not at all. The Baron is a very high rank in itself, only outranked by (in order), Earl, Duke, Prince (where the distinction between Duke and Prince exists), King, Emperor.
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron) I think you'll find you're wrong. Baron is the lowest rank of landed nobility.
I really should have gotten involved in this thread earlier.
Quote Posted by Petike the Taffer
I'm not sure, but the apparent consensus on TTLG is, that the City is an independent city-state, with the Baron as it's head. As for the vagueness of the Baron's title :
Even today, small monarchies survive in several parts of Europe, often being former parts of bigger empires. Most of these therefore still carry titles traditionally ranked lower than "kingdom" (lat. regis). The same goes for their rulers. Most of these states are recognised as either "principalities" or "duchies" in the English naming system : the Principality of Monaco, Principality of Lichtenstein, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, etc. Heck, even Andorra declares itself a principality, if only by tradition - since it never had any nobility and is technically a republic (with slight monarchic elements). So, the Baron of the City in Garrett's world could be a title with a similarly complicated history behind it. The City might have been a part of a once greater empire, that lost it's fortune and political power ages ago, and became balkanised into many smaller nations, some more succesful than the others.
This is more accurate - one can make a strong theory that the City was once part of a larger Empire or Kingdom, and has since become an independent city-state. I'm sure Jason can produce the requisite King quote from 'Thieves' Guild'.
.j.
jtr7 on 8/1/2009 at 01:33
At your service:
m15creed.str:
[INDENT]"We chose our profession in defiance of the greed of the monarchy.
We will not live for the sake of taxes to fatten the noble's pockets.
We choose to live the only life available to those who would truly be free.
We are Thieves.
--Creed of the Downwinders"[/INDENT]
Assassins! briefing:
[INDENT]"The ancient corruption was again contained.
To do more would have upset the balance, but we knew to remain ever vigilant lest it resurface.
Neither the Hammers nor the pagans could be trusted not to meddle.
--Keeper annals"[/INDENT]
Besides, somebody's singing Trickster songs, and building Trickster temples, and writing on clay tablets, and writing the "Not Yets" prophesy manuscripts and such to be found, and it may just as well be the Pagans.
Since T1 & T2 are two parts of the same overall story, I view Viki's use of the word "pagan" as being directly related to the T1 Keeper's use of it.
[INDENT]"I have no time for your vengeful thoughts and biting words. But be assured, Garrett, you're stronger with us than without us. We've been watching the Mechanists for three moons. Pagan agents are posted in every sector of the city. Your report, Larkspur?"[/INDENT]
Herr_Garrett on 8/1/2009 at 07:45
Nowadays. Not originally. And I was talking about 'originally'. And I can produce my sources, if you want :cheeky: Anyway, it is all relative, since in Hungary, for example, there were, to my knowledge, more than 30 high ranks, each with its own title and land and rights, and moreover Barons in Hungary, Poland, the Holy-German Roman Empire and I think even in France were the top guys.
"A bárók vagy más néven országbárók (latinul barones regni) a középkori Magyar Királyság legfontosabb tisztségviselői, vezető politikusai, a királyi tanács tagjai voltak. Zászlósuraknak is nevezték őket, mivel a banderiális hadszervezet korában bandérium tartására voltak kötelezve.
Bárói méltóságok Luxemburgi Zsigmond idejében:
* a nádorispán (comes palatinus)
* az erdélyi vajda (woyuoda Transsiluanus)
* az országbíró (iudex curiae regiae)
* Horvátország, Szlavónia, Dalmácia, Macsó és Szörény bánjai (bani)
* a tárnokmester (magister tavernicorum)
* az ajtonállómester (ianitorum regalium magister)
* az asztalnokmester (dapiferorum regalium magister)
* a pohárnokmester (pincernarum regalium magister)
* a lovászmester (agasonum regalium magister)
* a pozsonyi és a temesi ispán
* a főkincstárnok (summus thesaurarius)
* a székelyek ispánja (comes Siculorum)
* a titkos kancellár"
-from wikipedia
Translation: The barons, or state-barons (barones regni) were the most important office holders and leading politicans of the mediaeval Kingdom of Hungary, and members of the Privy Council. They were often called lords bannermen, since in the age of banderial armies they were bound to raise banners.
Baronial titles under Sigismund of Luxemburg (NB: he was German-Roman Emperor as well):
List of the titles
Anyway, this is just the stuff about Hungary. More western-wise,
originally, it was the same, too.
Beleg Cúthalion on 8/1/2009 at 09:18
In Germany, however, a Baron (which was AFAIK only the title to address him, left aside that no Baron was crowned/elected a Baron in the German territory, our equivalent was the Freiherr – free lord or something) was indeed a lower nobleman. Funnily, Wikipedia tells me that the Baron in England (established since 14th ct.) is addressed as a Lord as well.
I think that's just missing accuracy at LG's end. Otherwise, a Baron could just be something else in the Thief world; I believe Herrn Garrett if he says that this was the case in Hungary. I always like to point out the dramaturgical restriction to The City and its immediate surroundings which makes anything else practically superfluous. I mean, the sheer existence of other cities would force the Keepers to take sides in the case of a war or siege (either defend it and thus lose balance or leave it and thus risk destruction) which appears to me as a greater no-no than having no relevant other cities at all. :p
Other than that, there is AFAIK nothing against The City being a self-governed one still in the territory of an empire. Think of the Italian trading cities rebelling against the Roman/German emperor.
Herr_Garrett on 8/1/2009 at 11:17
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
In Germany, however, a Baron (which was AFAIK only the title to address him, left aside that no Baron was crowned/elected a Baron in the German territory, our equivalent was the
Freiherr – free lord or something) was indeed a lower nobleman. Funnily, Wikipedia tells me that the Baron in England (established since 14th ct.) is addressed as a
Lord as well.
The title 'Baron' was established in England under Edward the Confessor and William the Conqueror. That's a fact.
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
Other than that, there is AFAIK nothing against The City being a self-governed one
still in the territory of an empire. Think of the Italian trading cities rebelling against the Roman/German emperor.
Well, I have seen the "world maps" of the Thief-universe, but still... Of course there should be other... places, too, no just the City, but it's so hard to imagine it, isn't it? I mean... what would they be like? And yes, there's the issue with the Keepers... There might be empires out there, but, there again, there might not be. We never hear of anything outside of the City (apart from Blackbrook), and the Hammers seem to be restricted to the City only, too (as well as the Mechanists) - yet surely any sensible ruler would see the advantage of having them in their own realm. Bit of a puzzler, that.
Beleg Cúthalion on 8/1/2009 at 14:54
Apparently you're right about William, don't know where that comment in my Wikipedia came from. Pardon, wasn't my intention. Looking at the English article I found this paragraph about sheriffs. Since we're far away from the three factions anyway...
Quote Posted by Wikipedia
Within a century of the Norman Conquest, as in Thomas Becket's case (1164), there arose the practice of sending to each greater baron a special summons to the council that evolved into the House of Lords, while the lesser barons, Magna Carta (1215) stipulated, would receive summons only in general, through the sheriffs. Thus appeared a definite distinction, which eventually had the effect of restricting to the greater barons the rights and privileges of peerage.
About fantasy cities, well, look at LotR for instance. It hardly features any regular infrastructure in its countries. Gondor
is Minas Anor and Osgiliath. Rohan
is Edoras and Helm's Deep. We have some sort of miniature/symbolic world here and our miniature universe is a coastal trading city with a working government (some way or the other) and all the other pretty things.
Herr_Garrett on 8/1/2009 at 15:46
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
Gondor
is Minas Anor and Osgiliath. Rohan
is Edoras and Helm's Deep. We have some sort of miniature/symbolic world here and our miniature universe is a coastal trading city with a working government (some way or the other) and all the other pretty things.
Gondor is: Minas Tirith, Osgiliath no longer (where did you get that idea? It was ruined and abandoned in the civil war, some 1500 years ere the events in LoTR), Lebennin, Pelennor, Dol Amroth, Erech, Pelargir, Ithilien (altough in the last years abandoned), Anórien, Lossarnach, Linhir, Edhellonde - just a few that jumps to mind :cheeky: Gondor is a fully working state.
Rohan, now - it's true that they had quite few settlements, and that the only significant among them was Edoras (Helm's Deep was but a fastness, not a settlement), but within the the Four Marks the Rohirrim still did dwell; scattered, half-nomadic, with the occasional village. They did form a realm, though.
Anyway, anyway, we digress overmuch...
So basically, the existence of the title 'Baron' does not necessarily imply to the existence of a title which outranks it. Period. :p :cheeky:
P.S. Never mind about wikipedia, it's a load of absolute tosh. I only use it if it's really necessary, or if some rather deranged people regard it as the 'ultimate authority'... So that you can go and prove them wrong :ebil:
Beleg Cúthalion on 8/1/2009 at 20:18
I usually only hear bad comments about Wikipedia from people who don't see their own opinion engraved there. :p
Quote Posted by Herr Garrett
Gondor is: Minas Tirith, Osgiliath no longer (where did you get that idea? It was ruined and abandoned in the civil war, some 1500 years ere the events in LoTR)
Oh, I just wanted to even increase the number of cities instead of leaving them out.
Region.
Field.
Quote:
Dol Amroth, Erech, Pelargir
Ah, three cities, however all of them are destroyed or abandoned at the time of LotR, just because you mocked Osgiliath :p.
Quote:
Ithilien (altough in the last years abandoned), Anórien, Lossarnach
Regions.
A town, after all.
Quote:
Edhellonde - just a few that jumps to mind Gondor is a fully working state.
I didn't find the last one. And I used the Tolkien Wiki, just in case you need that to prove me wrong. :p Seriously, I never said Gondor wasn't a
fully working state, it's just that it rarely has any cities (our City has Mountains as well, and regions even more), maybe more than Rohan, but IMHO for dramaturgical reasons. I mean, what would it be like if the most evil boss didn't came to the only real city where the heroes would live but capture dozens of villages beforehand? I guess it's the same with our City, that's why I would not try to invent too fancy ways of making it believable somehow - especially if there's even less canonical evidence than for LotR. I like digging in the files (or observe jtr7 doing it) and searching for related stuff in history to fill in the gaps, but I do think the artistic elements will always catch us before reality does.
